Europe should join the fight

against terrorism

Wall Street Journal-Europe (editorial
page),

August 8, 1996

(krt@iran.org)

Washington, DC, Aug 6 - When U.S. President Bill Clinton signed
into law new legislation aimed at curbing terrorism by Iran and Libya
on Monday, European governments reacted with pious indignation.
"Threatening extraterritorial sanctions against European companies
that invest a certain amount in these countries is the wrong way" to
prevent terrorism, said German Economics Minister Guenter
Rexrodt.

The law compels the U.S. President to impose sanctions on the
American-based operations of foreign corporations that make new
investments of $40 million or more in the oil and gas industries of
Iran and Libya. Oil revenues comprise more than 80% of Iran's and
Libya's GDPs.

The European Union has condemned the measure as "U.S. bullying,"
and is threatening protectionist measures against U.S. firms. The
retaliatory regulations currently under review by the European
Commission would make it illegal for any American resident in Europe
to comply with the U.S. anti-terrorist legislation.

European insincerity.

"We in the European Union fully support the determination of the
United States to combat terrorism," said Sir Leon Brittan, Vice
President of the European Commission. But the Iran-Libya sanctions
signed into law by President Clinton on Monday "establishes the
unwelcome principle that one country can dictate the foreign policy
of others," Sir Leon said.

Seen from Washington, the European reaction smacks of insincerity,
at best, since the Clinton administration has engaged in a massive
diplomatic campaign over the past three years to win European support
for a tougher approach toward Iran and Libya. "The Europeans have
been briefed at every level, from the President on down," said one
senior U.S. official engaged in these efforts. "This is an important
issue and it has been pressed vigorously and constantly, through
detailed discussions and intelligence exchanges."

At one recent session in Washington, European diplomats were shown
satellite photographs of terrorist training camps in Iran, where the
U.S. believes the Islamic Republic has trained Hezbollah operatives
who have carried out terrorist attacks in Lebanon, Israel, Saudi
Arabia, and Bahrain. Said one Belgian diplomat who attended the
session: "We were not impressed. The United States has never
presented convincing evidence of Iran's involvement in
terrorism."

Ironically, some of the best information on Iranian state
terrorism in recent years comes from European courts, which have
investigated a spate of terrorist attacks against Iranian exiles
living in Europe. In France, Germany, Turkey, and Italy,
investigators have followed the trail of the assassins directly back
to government offices in Tehran or to embassies and consulates of the
Islamic Republic in Europe.

In Austria, the Vienna police actually detained a senior Islamic
Republic official who was wounded while participating in the
assassination of Iranian Kurdish leader Abdulrahman Qassemlou in July
1989. They released him a few weeks later under political pressure
from Tehran. Last month, the same official led a military operation
against Iranian Kurds living in northern Iraq.

But Iran's terror network is not confined to attacks against
Iranian exiles, dismissed by one European Union official here as
"road kill."

In Bahrain, with help from British intelligence, government
officials have exposed an Iranian-backed terrorist network that has
carried out bombings aimed at overthrowing the pro-Western Emir. In
Israel, the CIA believes Iran directed at least one of the suicide
bombings that killed 59 people in February and March. Now U.S.
investigators are exploring possible links between the Islamic
Republic and the bombing in Dhahran in June and the downing of TWA
flight 800. For the Islamic Republic, terrorism is an instrument of
state policy. But because Tehran has directed its terrorist attacks
primarily against the United States and U.S. allies in the Middle
East, Europe has managed to stand aloof, while maintaining extensive
commercial ties to Tehran.

The leaders of the Islamic Republic have been heartened by
Europe's cynical dialogue with Tehran, and have gleefully exploited
European greed. They believe that by offering commercial incentives
to European firms they can drive a wedge between European governments
and the United States, which will enable them - literally - to get
away with murder.

The Islamic Republic's ambassador to Germany, Seyed Hossein
Mousavian, expressed this approach perfectly in an interview granted
to a German newspaper in June. Germany could expect to win $25
billion in fresh business with Iran, he said, as long as Bonn did
"not yield to the will of the United States."

The terror apparatus of the Islamic Republic is not merely some
kind of malignant appendage to an otherwise healthy body: it is a way
of government. Potential terrorist operations are drafted by the
intelligence services and then proposed to the leadership. Before
they can be carried out, they must be approved personally by
President Hashemi-Rafsanjani and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamene'i. For each attack against U.S., Israeli, or Saudi targets
that is finally approved, many others have been rejected because of
the risk they might be traced back to Tehran. (Only when it
assassinates Iranian dissidents does the Islamic Republic like its
fingerprints to appear).

Few European officials will privately dispute the facts of Iranian
government support for international terrorism. Nor will they argue
the dangers presented by the Islamic Republic's pursuit of nuclear
weapons, or its abysmal violation of human rights. But they fiercely
contend that punishing Tehran is the wrong approach. The problem is,
they offer no alternative to their own crass mercantilism, and have
nothing to show for years of concessions except for billions of
dollars of questionable business deals.

Failed American Leadership

The case with Libya is only slightly different. Europe has
supported limited United Nations sanctions against Tripoli, which
counter-terrorism experts believe have had a deterrent effect on
strongman Mohammar Qaddafi and have prevented specific terrorist
acts. However, sanctions alone have been unable to force Mr. Qaddafi
to hand over the two Libyan intelligence agents indicted for their
role in the Pan Am 103 tragedy in Lockerbie, when 270 persons
perished. Stronger medicine is clearly needed, but President Clinton
has failed to demonstrate the leadership necessary to galvanize
Europe into a united front while the Europeans have steadfastly
refused tougher measures against Tehran and Tripoli, preferring to
lick past wounds than to suffer further economic loss. Embargoes are
not always effective, but Europe's coy refusal to acknowledge the
need for more effective action against terrorism harks back to a
darker era, when Prime Ministers in Paris and London brilliantly
announced "peace in our time." Today's slogan, more aptly phrased,
would be "jobs in our time."

This is the little Europe, the Europe of appeasement, the Europe
that prefers cynical business dealings with powers which spurn the
values that have made Europe and America repositories of decency and
freedom.

Today Europe must choose between its cynical dialogue with foreign
tyranny, or its two hundred-year old friendship with America. This is
a core issue that defines strategic relationships. Libya and the
Islamic Republic of Iran have understood this: Europe should,
too.

Kenneth Timmerman is the Executive Director of the Foundation
for Democracy in Iran (FDI). FDI is a private, non-profit corporation
registered in the State of Maryland. FDI materials, including the FDI
News Update, are available free-of-charge via the Internet at
http://www.iran.org/.